Okay controversy time.
As a fan of openSUSE, its many incarnations and tools I think one tool that is both good and bad in its own right is YaST.
Lets talk about the good first as it does have a lot of great merits:
It has a wonderful software center, while yeah it is starting to show its age and may be too old school for some folk compared to say mint software center or muon discover I still rather have it then Ubuntu software center.
Though I will say openSUSE could use something like mint software center (and no apper doesnt count, sorry to say but apper really isnt all that great in my opinion) I cannot deny the versatility of YaST software center.
It offers great tools for partitioning, configuring GRUB, general system configuration such as display management, managing system profiles, a configuration for app armor and so on.
But on the other hand the default system control centers in all of the major desktops have a lot of the same settings that are in YaST, even gnome 3’s control center still has a vast amount of tools in it.
Plus it is sort of YaST’s fault why on some systems you need to switch from ifup to the default network app in kde/gnome/xfce/etc I am beginning to ask the same question I heard in other places: why doesnt openSUSE just drop YaST?
It seems like a relic of a bygone age, a un needed tool for jobs well covered in some areas.
Sure its useful in recovery as its ncurses gui is top notch but the rest of it seems it has outlived its usefulness.
*note this is not a slam, just observations on the progress of the linux desktop over the need of tools like YaST.
Personally speaking, YaST and the overall polish that openSUSE brings are the key reasons why I use it. (Several years ago I was a RH/Fedora fan.) However, I’ll be very interested in what others have to say on the subject.
==>without YaST i cannot configure my repos and install packages
==>Without YaST i cannot cnvert my directory with bunch of rpms into a
repository
==>When i installed 13.1 i had two network interface eth0 and enp2s0
listed. Thanks to YaST i could get rid of one of them.
==>Thanks to YaST i could install/configure my scanner after installing
each version of openSUSE.
==>Sometimes i use the NTP tool in YaST synchronize the clock on my machine.
==>Using YaST i added my userid to the “vboxusers” group so that i can
use Virtualbox.
==>I partition my usb/pen drives using YaST Partitioner.
==>I can edit many settings(changing YaST gui is on of them) using
/etc/sysconfig tool.
How will do all these things without YaST? I am not willing to do all of
the above manually by editing files and stuff.
There’s a choice between NetworkManager and “ifup”. Choice is good.
If you would prefer the default to always be NetworkManager, then propose that at “openFate”. I don’t have strong feelings one way or the other. At present, the installer defaults to “ifup” on a Desktop and NetworkManager on a laptop, though perhaps it occasionally gets that wrong.
But I want “ifup” to still be their, even if it requires manual selection. For a server system, it is more appropriate than is NetworkManager. And that can even apply to a small home server.
Those are YaSTs main selling points, but if they could become a part of the native DE in some fashion it would be nice.
Otherwise mostly the DE’s do a great job at things.
There’s a choice between NetworkManager and “ifup”. Choice is good.
If you would prefer the default to always be NetworkManager, then propose that at “openFate”. I don’t have strong feelings one way or the other. At present, the installer defaults to “ifup” on a Desktop and NetworkManager on a laptop, though perhaps it occasionally gets that wrong.
Maybe I will take the issue to openFATE as the current mewthod does have its problems.
But maybe a good proposal would be to set the network manager during the setup with a step to allow the desktop to handle things or ifup, with the desktop as default and the ifup can be labeled “for servers”
MadmanRB wrote:
> Those are YaSTs main selling points, but if they could become a part of
> the native DE in some fashion it would be nice.
> Otherwise mostly the DE’s do a great job at things.
==>Linux has potentially a hundred DEs . How do you propose that all the
DEs incorporate all of YaST’s features.
==>And coming to server installations where admins are averse to
installing DEs, they would just install ncurses version of YaST and get
their work done. Otherwise they would need to sacrifice a machine’s
resources to run DEs.
GNOME 3.10.2
openSUSE 13.1 (Bottle) (x86_64) 64-bit
Kernel Linux 3.11.6-4-desktop
That is more convenient for the openSUSE project, supporting multiple server, desktop and DE sub-projects, than it is for users wedded to a single DE. A single installer serves them all. Then the decision is about single control centre versus separate tools. As a collection of tools, even with overlap, YaST is more useful for Sysadmins managing multiuser systems.
It’s always going to be easier for distros that specialize in providing just one DE, or desktop without server, etc.
On 2014-01-14, MadmanRB <MadmanRB@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> wrote:
> Lets talk about the good first as it does have a lot of great merits:
> It has a wonderful software center, while yeah it is starting to show
> its age and may be too old school for some folk compared to say mint
> software center or muon discover I still rather have it then Ubuntu
> software center.
I agree. A Ruby-written interface to navigate through http://software.opensuse.org within native YaST can’t be hard.
No. It has been ported to Ruby to meet future needs. Porting to Ruby what was already there was only a first step. Complexity of systems management is going to increase, having impact in many of the system areas.
Just as an experiment:
Try to implement LAMP, NIS/NFS, LDAP on some other popular distro. Do the same with Yast. No comparing.
> Those are YaSTs main selling points, but if they could become a part of
> the native DE in some fashion it would be nice.
> Otherwise mostly the DE’s do a great job at things.
What native DE? Maybe you are thinking of one. What about the rest?
There are many DE, and most of them lack the tools contained in YaST.
The one I use, for instance.
> Maybe I will take the issue to openFATE as the current mewthod does have
> its problems.
And I’d vote against.
–
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 12.3 x86_64 “Dartmouth” at Telcontar)
>
>MadmanRB;2615878 Wrote:
>> Plus it is sort of YaST’s fault why on some systems you need to switch
>> from ifup to the default network app in kde/gnome/xfce/etc
>
>I don’t understand that part at all.
>
>There’s a choice between NetworkManager and “ifup”. Choice is good.
>
>If you would prefer the default to always be NetworkManager, then
>propose that at “openFate”. I don’t have strong feelings one way or the
>other. At present, the installer defaults to “ifup” on a Desktop and
>NetworkManager on a laptop, though perhaps it occasionally gets that
>wrong.
>
>But I want “ifup” to still be their, even if it requires manual
>selection. For a server system, it is more appropriate than is
>NetworkManager. And that can even apply to a small home server.
To say the least. At home i have a statically addressed wired net and a
dynamically addressed wifi net. I go many places where i need to access
dynamically addressed networks, both wired and wireless. Being able to
dynamically suit the situation in user mode would be most welcome. Does
any distro do this yet?
To say the least. At home i have a statically addressed wired net and a
dynamically addressed wifi net. I go many places where i need to access
dynamically addressed networks, both wired and wireless. Being able to
dynamically suit the situation in user mode would be most welcome. Does
any distro do this yet?
I use NM to do that now in a my profession as a wireless/network engineer. (I have multiple wired and wireless profiles defined in NM.)
> To say the least. At home i have a statically addressed wired net and a
> dynamically addressed wifi net. I go many places where i need to access
> dynamically addressed networks, both wired and wireless. Being able to
> dynamically suit the situation in user mode would be most welcome. Does
> any distro do this yet?
>
Been doing that for several releases using Network manager - some NM
connections assign fixed addresses, others use dhcp. The 13.1 versions of
NM finally seem to get it right most of the time on anything 11.4 or above.
I still have to enter the pass phrase for dhcp assigned newly discovered
wifi connections otherwise it’s just a matter of selecting the desired ap
from the discovery list.
Yes but it is a rather annoying issue for newer users who may not know you have to switch.
My proposal to openFATE however does offer a choice to change network settings curing install as opposed to forcing ifup or newtwork manager:
Here is my proposal:
Currently there is a bit of a bugaboo with the installation of openSUSE that has been a pain in the rear for ages.
By default after first install iufup is chosen to handle the networks on desktops and network manager is selected as default on laptops.
However this can be a troublesome feature as if a new user comes along and wants to use openSUSE on their desktop and may not know how to change the network manager.
Now I understand the need for ifup as its good for servers but I feel better implementation of changing between is needed so I think an extra step during setup is in order.
Sure its an extra step but its a minor one that could help newer users transition into using openSUSE without banging their head trying to figure it out.
imply put this is a great idea for beginners who may may have heard of openSUSE but may not know some of its quirks.
openSUSE is definitely one of the most beginner friendly distributions for beginners but its network configuration needs a little help and can be a stumbling block if you dont know what you are doing.
By offering better context on setting up the network this could be a big help for those with little to no experience with linux.
Sure it maybe an extra step but think of the new user who has just installed openSUSE and has got all the way to the desktop and stumbles at one of the most common issues in openSUSE.
The need to use network manager as opposed to ifup to connect to the internet, its an issue that I know some have with the distribution and it should be noted or indicated or something during setup how the system is connecting to the internet.
Its a bit like riding an airplane and having a very smooth ride up until the plane has to land and the stewardess insists you fly the plane from here on in, but you have no flight training or experience take the plane in for a landing.
The option to switch between ifup and native network manager should be provided at least near the end of the initial install or during initial setup.
A clear indication is needed for what a new user needs to do to get it working.
There should be a dialog box that reads something along the lines of “network setup”
And something that says “openSUSE offers a choice for network settings for both pros and beginners alike, we offer you the option to choose what method of connection you would like”
And have discriptions of both options:
Use Network manager(for beginners and normal desktop/laptop users)
Use ifup (for experts and servers)
With "use network manager as the default and those who want to make a server can use the latter.
This fixes an woes on both the server end and the desktop end.